Bonus FOD 2012.01.16

Here's a list of obama's 'historic firsts.' He's been busy... (H/T Little Annie's Orphans)

First President to Preside Over a Cut to the Credit Rating of the United States Government

First President to Violate the War Powers Act

First President to Orchestrate the Sale of Murder Weapons to Mexican Drug Cartels

First President to issue an unlawful "recess-appointment" while the U.S. Senate remained in session (against the advice of his own Justice Department).

First President to be Held in Contempt of Court for Illegally Obstructing Oil Drilling in the Gulf of Mexico

First President to Defy a Federal Judge's Court Order to Cease Implementing the 'Health Care Reform' Law

First President to halt deportations of illegal aliens and grant them work permits, a form of stealth amnesty roughly equivalent to "The DREAM Act", which could not pass Congress

First President to Require All Americans to Purchase a Product From a Third Party

First President to Spend a Trillion Dollars on 'Shovel-Ready' Jobs -- and Later Admit There Was No Such Thing as Shovel-Ready Jobs

First President to sue states for requiring valid IDs to vote, even though the same administration requires valid IDs to travel by air

First President to Abrogate Bankruptcy Law to Turn Over Control of Companies to His Union Supporters

First President to sign into law a bill that permits the government to "hold anyone suspected of being associated with terrorism indefinitely, without any form of due process. No indictment. No judge or jury. No evidence. No trial. Just an indefinite jail sentence."

First President to Bypass Congress and Implement the DREAM Act Through Executive Fiat

First President to Threaten Insurance Companies After They Publicly Spoke out on How Obamacare Helped Cause their Rate Increases

First President to Threaten an Auto Company (Ford) After It Publicly Mocked Bailouts of GM and Chrysler

First President to "Order a Secret Amnesty Program that Stopped the Deportations of Illegal Immigrants Across the U.S., Including Those With Criminal Convictions"

First President to Demand a Company Hand Over $20 Billion to One of His Political Appointees

First President to Terminate America's Ability to Put a Man into Space.

First President to Encourage Racial Discrimination and Intimidation at Polling Places

First President to Have a Law Signed By an 'Auto-pen' Without Being "Present"

First President to Arbitrarily Declare an Existing Law Unconstitutional and Refuse to Enforce It

First President to Tell a Major Manufacturing Company In Which State They Are Allowed to Locate a Factory

First President to refuse to comply with a House Oversight Committee subpoena.

First President to File Lawsuits Against the States He Swore an Oath to Protect (AZ, WI, OH, IN, etc.)

First President to Withdraw an Existing Coal Permit That Had Been Properly Issued Years Ago

First President to Fire an Inspector General of Americorps for Catching One of His Friends in a Corruption Case

First President to Propose an Executive Order Demanding Companies Disclose Their Political Contributions to Bid on Government Contracts

First President to allow Mexican police to conduct law enforcement activities on American soil

First President to Golf 90 or More Times in His First Three Years in Office.

Quite a record our little barry has compiled, eh...

FOD 2012.01.16

We laugh to keep from crying...

Q: Why did Obama cross the road?

A: To get to the other 9 holes.

Q. What's the difference between Obama opponents and Obama supporters?

A. The first group works for a living while the second group votes for a living.

Have you heard about the new Obama Happy Meal for kids at McDonalds?

It comes with a promise that they'll get a toy someday.

Obama claims that he has a balanced budget plan.

It's exactly one half smoke and one half mirrors.

Michelle was talking about how considerate her husband is, often buying her surprise gifts for no reason. She went on to say that the presents weren't anything extravagant or expensive because Barack tends to be responsible when he's spending his own money.

A Welcome Trend Continued

There were a couple of high-profile home invasions a week or so ago where the potential victims, armed with shotguns, fought back and wounded or killed the perpetrators. The same thing recently happened a lot closer to home.

A home invasion on the Northeast Side ended in a gunfight in which one suspect was killed and another was critically injured early Wednesday, police said. The homeowner also was wounded.

Andrew W. Wharmby, 27, told officers he heard banging on his front door about 4:40 a.m. He told officers he became suspicious and grabbed his shotgun as he walked to the door.

He then heard noise in his garage, and when he saw the two men walk into his house, he shot at both. At least one of them returned fire and shot him in the face.

Police found one of the suspects — believed to be in his late teens or 20s — dead in the garage. The other was flown to San Antonio Military Medical Center in critical condition with a gunshot wound to the chest.

Wharmby, the homeowner, was shot in the chin... He also was taken to (the hospital), and was listed in stable condition.

I just love a happy ending...

Sunday Funnies 2012.01.15

The new semester starts tomorrow. New faces, same old students...

If College Students Wrote the Bible:

The Ten Commandments would actually be only five -- double-spaced and written in a large font.

Instead of God creating the world in six days and resting on the seventh, he would have put it off until the night before it was due and then pulled an all-nighter.

 

At the end of last semester I handed out the final exam to one of my classes, then settled in behind my desk and waited for them to complete it. One student handed in his exam with a $100 bill attached to it and a note that read "A dollar per point."

I called him into my office the next day and gave him his graded exam back - with $56 change.

Irish Flooding

To understand this post, go here and watch the video.

Thought For The Day

The word "politics" is derived from the word "poly", meaning 'many', and the word "ticks", meaning 'blood sucking parasites'.

 

Friday Follies Happy Hour

Next week the Spring semester begins. As I trudge back to the mines, forlornly hoping that this semester I'll discover a diamond in the rough, I'll be singing along with Los Lobos as they perform the Heigh Ho song from Snow White.



The fact that it's in Spanish is fitting, given that I work in Deep South Texas...

Reacting Predictably and Emotionally

Remember last week when the MSM was up in arms about the firebombing of a mosque in New York City? Typical headlines:

Firebomb attacks in New York targeting Muslims

New York mosque firebombed in ‘hate crime’ spree

New York leaders condemn mosque firebombing

In typical knee-jerk fashion, outraged liberals rose en masse to decry the 'hate crime' that reflected what they perceive as intolerance and persecution directed towards non-violent peace-loving followers of a 6th century pedophile.

The only problem is that the firebombing was the act of an individual with personal grievances against a cross-section of NYC establishments. He also is of Guyanese descent, further disappointing the leftists who were salivating at the thought of hanging the acts around the neck of a Tea Partier, NRA member, or other stereotypical right-wing extremist.

A man hurled crude firebombs at an Islamic cultural center in part because he wasn't allowed to use its bathrooms and targeted four other New York-area sites on New Year's Day because of personal grievances, a law enforcement official said Tuesday.

Police said that Ray Lazier Lengend, 40, of Guyanese descent, was arrested Tuesday after he was tracked through a stolen car with Virginia license plates believed to be at the scene of at least two of the attacks Sunday evening on a convenience store, three homes and the cultural center.

Lengend, who lives in Jamaica, had furiously vowed to take revenge following his shoplifting arrest last Tuesday.

“When they were pushing him out of the store, he said words to the effect of, ‘We’re going to get even, we’re going to get back at you,’” Police commissioner Ray Kelly said.

The 179th St. Deli was the first of four Queens targets hit by the fire fiend, who also is suspected of striking at an Islamic center, a Hindu temple inside a home and a Jamaica home.

Even after Lazier was arrested and the motive behind the bombings became clear, muslim leaders continued to play the 'persecuted religion' card.

A series of fires in New York City, including one (one, count 'em, one) at an Islamic community center on Long Island, has many in the Muslim community calling out for awareness of increased anti-Islamic bias crimes in the city and across the nation.

One out of four, with no islamic connection. Yet in the minds of some this is indicative of (alleged) increased anti-muslim crimes. GMAFB!

This is so reminiscent of the Arizona shooting of one year ago in which six people were killed and many more wounded, including U.S. representative Gabrielle Giffords. As you'll recall, there were immediate outcries that the shooting was caused by political incivility fomented by the Tea Party and its supporters.

Of course, as we learned later, the shooter was a deranged leftist named Jared Loughner with no ties to the Tea Party or any other conservative organization

Sadly, but unsurprisingly, the facts have failed to deter leftists and their spokescreatures like Debbie Wassername Schultz from continuing to blame the shooting on the Tea Party. One year after the shooting, in response to a question about the lack of civility in congress, she said:

"We need to make sure that we tone things down, particularly in light of the Tucson tragedy from a year ago ... I hesitate to place blame, but I have noticed it take a very precipitous turn towards edginess and a lack of civility with the growth of the Tea Party movement."

Here's a link to the video, if you can stomach it.

There's a reason they're called knee-jerk liberals (Definition: a person of strong liberal convictions who reacts predictably and emotionally to certain events).

Piss Off

There's been quite a bit of sturm und drang over the recently posted video of U.S. Marines pissing on the bodies of dead camel-fucking scum taliban. Most of it, as you can imagine, has been a mixture of outrage and condemnation from such notable combat veterans and military experts as Leon Panetta and Hillary Clinton. Legitimate military personnel were also quick to condemn the act, although I suspect for different reasons.

Let me make this as clear as I can. I whole-heartedly agree with the sentiment underlying the Marines' actions. I understand the visceral feeling towards people who have quite likely killed and/or maimed your buddies, and are trying to do the same to you. But -- and this is a big but -- those Marines are supposed to be professionals. Their job is to dispatch the enemy as quickly and efficiently as possible. In other words, in a professional manner. What they did, however understandable, just provides propaganda and motivation for the other side.

"It is difficult to say what long-term impacts this might have, and I would hesitate to get into speculation, but obviously any sort of footage, any sort of activity of this kind ...  are very much working against our cause..." said Brig. Gen. Carsten Jacobson, a NATO ISAF spokesman.

Imagine that you're an Afghan who is not necessarily on the taliban's side, but remains unsure about the American presence. Something like this just might be enough to tip the scale and send you over to the other side. At the very least it makes you more leery and suspicious of, and less likely to help, American forces. It just makes everyone else's job that much more difficult, as evidenced by the following.

A Taliban spokesman called the video "barbaric."

"And no religion that follows a holy text would accept such conduct. This inhuman act reveals their real face to the world," Taliban spokesman Qari Yousuf Ahmadi said via text message Thursday.

"Islam gives values and respect to every human being," regardless of which religion the individual follows, said Islamic scholar Mawlawi Enayatullah Baligh. "The value and respect is the same for an alive person and a dead body. Even the body of your enemy in the battleground is respectable in Islam."

Yeah, right. Tell it to the innocent women and children killed by suicide bombers, the innocent women and children raped, tortured, and maimed in the name of islamic 'honor.'

I utterly and categorically reject any blather claiming that islam 'values and respects every human being.' I would gladly piss on the bodies of dead islamist extremists.

But -- and here's that 'but' again -- I am no longer a professional member of the armed forces. That's the tragedy of this whole thing. Skilled and motivated U.S. Marines are about to be buried under a ton of shit because one of them was foolish enough to record and then post a video of what I suspect is a relatively mild and common after-action event.

Does anyone think things like this didn't happen in the Pacific Theater during WWII? The Korean War? Or Viet Nam?

Thank goodness they didn't have cell phones or pocket video cameras back then...

Whoever's Doing It Please Don't Stop

A couple of months ago I posted something about the cybersecurity module I teach graduating IS (Information Systems) majors. In that module we talk about the importance of protecting critical infrastructure systems (power and water utilities, pipelines, telecommunications networks, etc.) from malware like viruses and worms. To keep the kids interested we examine how the Stuxnet worm disabled Iranian nuclear facilities.

To make it even more interesting, and to point out the value of 'human infrastructure' - scientists, engineers, technicians - I include the ongoing assassinations of Iranian nuclear scientists. I frame it like a James Bond movie (nowadays, I guess it should be Mission: Impossible). "Here's an impenetrable target. How can you render it useless without direct military action?"

The kids really get into it. It's one of the more popular modules of the course.

I guess now I'll have to update my notes. Another Iranian glow-in-the-dark mole got whacked yesterday.

An explosion on Wednesday killed Mostafa Ahmadi Roshan, a top official at the Natanz uranium enrichment plant, Iranian officials said.

He is the third man identified as a nuclear scientist to be killed in Iran in a mysterious explosion in the past two years. A fourth survived an assassination attempt.

In each case, someone placed a bomb under the scientist's car.

Iranian officials, on state-run media, blame Israel and the United States.

Of course they do. Who else but Zionists and the Great Satan would do such a thing?

Turns out there are Iranian dissidents who might be involved as well.

"The most likely contender among people who are following this is that the Israelis are doing it, possibly in cooperation with the Iranian mujahedin," said Trita Parsi, president of the National Iranian-American Council and author of the book "A Single Roll of the Dice: Obama's Diplomacy with Iran."

"There's almost no downside for Israel," he said. The killings "take out nuclear assets and embarrass Iran" by showing that the regime can't prevent such attacks, Parsi said. And "if Iran retaliates with a violent act, then Israel can point to it as a reason to take military action against the regime."

Gotta give the Israelis credit. They're masters at this sort of thing.
 
Mid-east experts doubt that the U.S. is involved, with one going so far as to say "Frankly, I don't think the United States has the human intelligence knowledge..."

Sadly, I agree with him. I also don't think the obama administration has either the brains or the cojones to pull off something like this.

The killings of Iranian scientists have come up on the campaign trail in the United States among contenders for the Republican presidential nomination. Newt Gingrich, at a debate in November, expressed support for the idea of "taking out their scientists." Rick Santorum, at an event in October, referred to the scientists turning up dead as "a wonderful thing."

I might not agree with Santorum on every political and social issue, but I'm with him 100% on this one.

So who's killing Iranian nuclear scientists?

I don't know and I don't care, but whoever it is, I hope they don't stop...

True Love

A man escapes from a prison where he's been locked up for 15 years.

He breaks into a house to look for money and guns. Inside, he finds a young couple in bed. He orders the guy out of bed and ties him to a chair. While tying the homeowner's wife to the bed, the convict gets on top of her, kisses her neck, then gets up and goes into the bathroom.

While he's in there, the husband whispers over to his wife, 'Listen, this guy is an escaped convict. Look at his clothes! He's probably spent a lot of time in jail and hasn't seen a woman in years. I saw how he kissed your neck. If he wants sex, don't resist, don't complain... do whatever he tells you. Satisfy him no matter how much he nauseates you. This guy is obviously very dangerous. If he gets angry, he'll kill us both. Be strong, honey. I love you!'

His wife responds, 'He wasn't kissing my neck. He was whispering in my ear. He told me that he's gay, thinks you're cute, and asked if we had any Vaseline. I told him it was in the bathroom. Be strong. I love you, too.'

What First Amendment?

One of the bloggers I follow* is not fond of obama, and is not shy about saying so. I don't think he's crossed any lines in exercising his God-given First Amendment right of free speech ("dissent is the highest form of patriotism"), but the jack-booted thugs masquerading as DHS officials may have a different opinion.

In the past they would have dismissed his posts as the alcohol-fueled rantings of a deranged right-wing extremist hater (translation: freedom-loving conservative), but under a new DHS program they are probably scurrying around busily compiling a dossier on this fine upstanding patriot.

Freedom of speech might allow journalists to get away with a lot in America, but the Department of Homeland Security is on the ready to make sure that the government is keeping dibs on who is saying what.

Specifically, the DHS announced the (National Operations Center) (NOC) and its Office of Operations Coordination and Planning (OPS) can collect personal information from news anchors, journalists, reporters or anyone who may use “traditional and/or social media... ”

"Social media" includes blogs, Facebook, and Twitter. They'll probably expand the definition to include texting, Instant messaging, and passing notes in class.

According to the Department of Homeland Security’s own definition of personal identifiable information, or PII, such data could consist of any intellect “that permits the identity of an individual to be directly or indirectly inferred, including any information which is linked or linkable to that individual.”

So much for anonymous sources. If this was around in the Watergate days Deep Throat never would have come forward, Richard Nixon would have served his full term, Gerald Ford never would have been president, and Jimmy Carter quite likely never would have been elected, which led to the subsequent election of Ronald Reagan.

Ain't alternative history fun?

...the new provisions in the NOC’s write-up means that any reporter, whether someone along the lines of Walter Cronkite or a budding blogger, can be victimized by the agency.

The department says that they will only scour publically-made info available while retaining data, but it doesn’t help but raise suspicion as to why the government is going out of their way to spend time, money and resources on watching over those that helped bring news to the masses.

Perhaps because the blogosphere has become a viable alternative to the propaganda arm of the dems/libs - aka the mainstream media.

The website Fast Company reports that the intel collected by the Department of Homeland Security under the NOC Monitoring Initiative has been happening since as early as 2010 and the data is being shared with both private sector businesses and international third parties.

WTF? Private businesses and international parties? Yet another example of why I love my country but really, truly, fear and detest the government.

(H/T Jammie Wearing Fools for the link, and also for pointing out that "This program began in 2010, so Bush can’t be blamed.")

*Dedicated to AB (initials have been changed to protect the innocent ... hell, I can't type that last line without laughing).

A Learning Experience

In spite of my earlier bitching about public school systems, I'm pretty happy with the one our kids attend. One of the reasons is that the school district provides them ample opportunities to learn outside the classroom. For instance, they have an outdoor academy where the students go off to a rustic camp for most of a week. There's no central air or heat, no TV or internet, they sleep in cabins, and spend the days fishing, taking nature hikes, and learning skills like orienteering.

The outdoor academy takes place during the regular school year. It's primarily for elementary and middle school students. Selected high school students get to go as instructors and counselors, under the supervision of teachers and parents (the kids handle the isolation better than some of the parents, who freak out when they discover that their cell phones don't have reception). It's a plum assignment for the high schoolers who get picked.

We just found out that this spring our 17-year-old son is one of the chosen few. He's thrilled, and we're thrilled for him. But (there's always a 'but,' isn't there) one of the requirements is that he take a course this semester in Child Development. Here's an excerpt:

In order to provide a realistic idea of the demands of parenting, you will be participating in a parenting simulation project. This involves caring for a lifelike, electronic parenting mannequin baby overnight (4:00 p.m. - 8:15 a.m.).

The baby mannequin cries, coos, burps, and needs its diaper changed periodically throughout the day and night. It will be your responsibility to provide proper care as if this were a real baby. The baby should be with you at all times.

(Side note: the technology involved in this thing is fascinating. Check out the link for more info.)

I'm not sure how caring for an artificial baby prepares one to ride herd on a bunch of first graders, but I doubt if the experience will do any lasting harm. I am curious to see if he wakes up in the middle of the night when the baby frankenstein needs changing - the boy could sleep through an earthquake.

He had to take a similar course back in middle school (don't ask). He was given a 10-pound bag of flour that he had to treat like a baby; name it (Walter - again, don't ask), draw a face on it, dress it up, diaper it and change it regularly, take it everywhere with him for a week, and so forth. He got through that ordeal okay, then used Walter as a pellet-gun target. I'm not sure what that bodes for his flesh-and-blood offspring when they come along, but I don't think it's anything good ("I told you to pick up your toys." ... Poof! ... OUCH!!!)

With any luck the combination of Walter and this new electronic version will make him more cognizant of the risks associated with unprotected sex. Getting woken up at 3:00 in the morning by your 'child' will drive that point home more effectively than any number of parental lectures.

FOD 2012.01.09

I don't know who is going to emerge from the flustercluck that is the republican nominating process, but whoever it is should include the following two graphics in every ad and piece of campaign literature. The point is to run against obama's miserable record of colossal failure and incompetence, not against other republicans.

And if whoever the nominee is really wants to drive the point home, he can add the one below.

Choke On This, Jerry

Roland Martin is a political commentator who usually leans to the left. I don't often agree with him, but IMO he is spot on with this one.

Football power in Texas has shifted to Houston

I hate the Dallas Cowboys.

No, I don't dislike them. I flat out cannot stand anything about the Dallas Cowboys.

That's why I take great pleasure in seeing the transfer of power in the Lone Star State, where the football greatness has moved from Dallas to Houston.

For decades, all of the talk has been about the Cowboys, that damn star, and lately, the monstrosity of a football palace built by owner Jerry Jones. But with the NFL playoffs kicking off this weekend, the only football they'll witness at Cowboys Stadium is Kansas State and Arkansas in the Cotton Bowl.

But 250 miles south of Dallas, the Houston Texans will take on the Cincinnati Bengals in the AFC wild card game.

For Cowboys fans, it's over. No longer can you talk supremacy over Houston. The expansion Texans is the talk of the state, and all the Cowboys fans can do is complain about Tony Romo and Jerry Jones.

And they might as well get used to it. The Cowboys are truly a has-been team. Those five Lombardi trophies? Well, you better keep watching NFL Films. That will be the only way to see Dallas raise that again.

Amen to that last one - at least as long as Jerry Jones runs things.

JJ may be an astute businessman, but he's worse than terrible as a NFL general manager. He is the NFL equivalent of obama, insofar as on-the-field success goes. He surrounds himself with boot-licking yes-men. His opinion of himself is much greater than the reality. He took over an entity that was once the envy of its kind, but under his stewardship has become a shadow of its former self and a laughing-stock.

The bad news for Cowboy fans is that they can't vote the buffoon out of office...

(H/T The Whited Sepulchre for the image.)

Sunday Funnies 2012.01.08

Today's theme is Adam and Eve. New year ... new beginning ... genesis ... get it?

 

Seems God was just about done creating the universe, but he had two extra things left in his bag of creations, so he decided to split them between Adam and Eve.

He told the couple that one of the things he had to give away was the ability to stand up while urinating. "It's a very handy thing," God told the couple, who he found hanging around under an apple tree. "I was wondering if either one of you wanted that ability."

Adam jumped up and blurted, "Oh, give that to me! When I'm working in the garden or naming the animals, I could just stand there and let it fly. It'd be so cool I could write my name in the sand. Oh, please God, let it be me who you give that gift to, let me stand and pee, oh please."

On and on he went like an excited little boy who had to pee. Eve just smiled and told God that if Adam really wanted that so badly he could have it. It seemed to be the sort of thing that would make him happy, and she really wouldn't mind if Adam was the one given this ability.

And so Adam was given the ability to control the direction of his urination while in a vertical position. And lo, he was happy and did celebrate by wetting down the bark on the tree nearest him, laughing with delight all the while. And it was good.

"Fine", God said, looking back into his bag of leftover gifts. "What's left here? Oh yes, multiple orgasms."

 

One day the Lord came to Adam to pass on some news. "I've got some good news and some bad news" said the Lord.

Adam looked at the Lord and said, "Well, give me the good news first."

Smiling, the Lord explained, "I've got two new organs for you.  One is called the brain. It will allow you to be very intelligent, create new things and have intelligent coversations with Eve. The other organ I have for you is a called a penis. It will allow you to reproduce your own lifeform and populate this planet. Eve will be very happy that you now have this organ to give her children."

Adam, very excited, exclaimed "these are great gifts you have given me. What could possibly be bad news after such great tidings?"

The Lord looked upon Adam and said with great sorrow, "the bad news is that when I created you I only gave you enough blood to operate one of these organs at a time."

ABO

ABO = Anybody But Obama.

There's been a lot of commentary about Romney's landslide win in Iowa ("landslide" is defined as an 8 vote margin of victory) and what it all means. McCain's subsequent endorsement of Romney prompted considerable gnashing of teeth among the more conservative members of the GOP.

The combined result has been mutterings that Romney is just another political hack forced down our throats by the republican establishment, and that there is little difference between him and obama. Both are political insiders; both are pro-big government; neither will take the hard steps necessary to eliminate budget deficits and bring the federal regulatory apparatus under control. Some have even said they will sit out the election, or vote for a third party candidate, rather than vote for Romney if he wins the nomination.

My response to those who feel that way is two words: judicial appointments. The President of the United States appoints federal judges not just at the Supreme Court level, but also at the circuit court (aka the courts of appeals) and the district court levels. These appointments are for life. This gives a president an enormous opportunity to leave his stamp on this country for decades, or even longer. (The president also appoints 'specialty' judges, such as bankruptcy and tax court judges, but these are appointed for a specific term, not for life.)

The two most obvious examples of obama's record in this matter are his selections for the Supreme Court: Sonia Sotomayor, the so-called 'wise latina;' and Elena Kagan, obama's former Solicitor General.

(Side note: as Solicitor General, Kagan ruled that obamacare was constitutional. Now she's sitting on the Supreme Court that is scheduled to hear arguments challenging that ruling. Think she'll be objective...?)

Say what you will about Romney, but IMO his choices for federal judgeships would be infinitely preferable to obama's (Chief Justice Eric Holder, anyone?).

So those of you who are thinking about not voting, or casting a protest vote for a third party candidate, please reconsider. Romney may not be your first choice, or even second, or third, or ... but he's better than that SCOAMF currently ruining this country. We simply cannot survive another four years with obama in power.

Repeat after me ... ABO ... ABO ... ABO ...

Rules For Conquering The Gym

Jason Gay of the Wall Street Journal has some advice for people whose New Year's resolution is to lose weight. Jason set forth 27 rules for conquering the gym, but as a service to my busy readers I'm only reporting the Top 10. If you want to know the rest you'll have to visit the link.

1. A gym is not designed to make you feel instantly better about yourself. If a gym wanted to make you feel instantly better about yourself, it would be a bar.

2. Give yourself a goal. Maybe you want to lose 10 pounds. Maybe you want to quarterback the New York Jets Dallas Cowboys into the playoffs. But be warned: Losing 10 pounds is hard.

12. Nope, that's not a "recovery energy bar with antioxidant dark chocolate." That's a chocolate bar.

15. If you're motivated to buy an expensive home exercise machine, consider a "wooden coat rack." It costs $40, uses no electricity and does the exact same thing.

17. If you see an indoor rock climbing wall, you're either in a really cool gym or a romantic comedy starring Kate Hudson.

19. If a gym class is going to be effective, it's hard. If you're relaxed and enjoying yourself, you're at brunch.

22. Fancy gyms can be seductive, but once you get past the modern couches and fresh flowers and the water with lemon slices, you're basically paying for a boutique hotel with B.O.

25. Fact: Thinking about going to the gym burns between 0 and 0 calories.

26. A successful gym membership is like a marriage: If it's good, you show up committed and ready for hard work. If it's not good, you show up in sweatpants and watch a lot of bad TV.

27. There is no secret. Exercise and lay off the fries.

Jason overlooked my personal favorite:

Rehydrating with Shiners defeats the purpose of going to the gym in the first place.

Friday Follies Happy Hour 2012.01.06

I've got a physical coming up next week. I don't know why I bother going. I know what the doctor is going to say.

"If you dig it, don't do it
And if you like it, better leave it alone"

Sigh...

Quick Hits

Random quotes from the Friday Jan. 6 issue of the San Antonio Express-News.

"I understand a rich man from the Philippines wants to buy the Dallas Cowboys. He'll change the name to the Manilla Folders."
-- David Plylar, letter to the editor

"Romney remains the electable one, Santorum the acceptable one; then there's Ron Quixote."
-- Micheal Gerson, columnist

"So Mitt Romney 'won' Iowa by eight votes ... What happened to Rick Santorum's surge? Did a Dodge Caravan full of supporters break down on the way (to vote)?
-- Froma Harrop, columnist

A Welcome Trend

It's a little early to declare two recent events a trend, but one can hope.

A couple of days ago a teen mom shot one of two men who broke into her house and threatened her and her new-born daughter.

The incident described below happened two days prior to that one, but authorities didn't release any information until yesterday.

Police in North Carolina revealed a 14-year-old boy shot dead an intruder attempting to break into his home while he and his sister were alone.

... police said the 14-year-old and his sister were at home in the rural town of Henderson when four men tried to break into the house.

The teen opened fire with a shotgun while his 17-year-old sister hid in a closet as a gang of men attempted to smash their way into their home.

Michael Anthony Henderson Jr, 19, was shot dead.

He staggered away from the house and collapsed where he was found by police.

His brother Seneca, 20, and one other man Andrew Terry, 23, have already been charged in the case.

Police are still searching for a third man named as 21-year-old Jatwaun Davis.

Vermin that tried to invade the North Carolina home.

 In the call, the teen, says: 'I just shot the man. He came around the corner. I shot him. He broke the whole glass out (of the back door).'

He continues: '... I got one more in the chamber. I'm going to shoot again,' the boy said.

Police said the teen will not face any charges...

He damn well shouldn't face charges. If anything, he should get a medal for protecting his sister. (I especially liked the part where he said " I got one more in the chamber. I'm going to shoot again.")

Both cases have two things in common. One, the people defending themselves were not just outnumbered, but at a physical disadvantage; a young woman, and a 14-year-old boy vs. grown men. Two, in both cases the weapon used was a shotgun.

A shotgun is a great weapon for home defense. It requires less fine motor skills to operate and aim than a handgun, something to keep in mind as adrenalin surges through the system. If loaded with shot rather than slugs, it is also less likely to penetrate interior walls and threaten other family members.

Plus it's just so damn intimidating...

Hopefully these recent events will give pause to the scum who prey on the (supposedly) weak and helpless, but somehow I doubt it. But at least we taxpayers won't have to foot the bills for an endless series of trials and appeals, followed by room and board (and cable TV and exercise facilities and all the other benefits that criminals shouldn't be allowed).

Do You Really Get What You Pay For? Update

In my earlier post I left out one additional step to take to improve our public education system: parental involvement.

Kenya Parents Attack Teachers Over Exams Results

The chairman of the Kenyan teachers' union says angry parents are attacking teachers nationwide after their children's dismal performance in a national exam.

Okay, physically attacking teachers might be a little extreme, but the underlying concept is valid. Institute some form of individual accountability to hold teachers and administrators responsible for student performance.

And while we're at it, let's hold the little darlings and their parents responsible as well. After all, there's enough blame for this mess to go around...

Do You Really Get What You Pay For? - Part II

Yesterday we commented on some of the causes and effects of the disaster our public school systems have become. Today we'll extend that thought into the higher education arena. First, some figures to support the argument that public schools are graduating students who are unprepared for college.

Three out of four graduates aren’t fully prepared for college and likely need to take at least one remedial class, according to the latest annual survey from the nonprofit testing organization ACT, which measured half of the nation’s high school seniors in English, math, reading and science proficiency.

Only 25 percent cleared all of ACT’s college preparedness benchmarks, while 75 percent likely will spend part of their freshman year brushing up on high-school-level course work... Students are most likely to need remedial classes in science and math.

Even more damning, "...80 percent of college students taking remedial classes had a high school GPA of 3.0 or better."

Take it from one who has to teach classes full of unprepared students - students who can't write a simple complete sentence, much less a full paragraph; students who have little to no grasp of basic grammar; students who can't solve elementary math problems - it is beyond frustrating. I can handle the frustration. But can we as a society handle the more serious consequences?

And what are some of those consequences?

If I as the professor dumb down the class to accommodate those less prepared, the better prepared students feel like they're just repeating high school. They get bored, distant, and develop bad study habits. Even worse, they are being held back from reaching their full potential.

(Side note: state universities receive government funds based on a complex formula that in large part is based on admission, retention, and graduation rates. If reasonable standards are enforced, less prepared students aren't admitted or later drop out, decreasing the government funds funneled to that particular school.)

Taxpayers, of course, also suffer. They are in essence paying twice for students to learn: once in high school, a second time in remedial college classes.

And of course taking remedial courses means the students themselves take longer, and pay more, to graduate.

Which leads to another problem: mounting student loans, and a so-called 'higher education bubble.'

It’s officially a crisis. Student loan debt has hit the $1 trillion mark, exceeding Americans’ total credit card indebtedness.

The real problem is that we’ve been running a higher education bubble, one that -- like the real-estate bubble -- has been pumped up by cheap government money. Since 1999, student loan debt has increased by 511%, while disposable income has increased by only 73%.

That’s because when the government subsidizes something, producers respond by raising prices to soak up as much of the subsidy as they can. College is no exception. Tuition has been increasing much faster than disposable income, and families -- believing that a college education is a can’t-lose investment, much as they used to think houses were -- have been making up the difference with debt. After all, we’re told, student loan debt is “good debt,” because a college degree guarantees more earnings.

The problem is, “college” isn’t an undifferentiated product. Companies can’t hire enough mechanical engineers, but there’s no bidding war for majors in Fine Arts or Women’s Studies, degrees that cost just as much, but deliver a lot less in terms of employment. In an economically rational market, it would be harder to borrow money to finance fields of study that were unlikely to produce enough income to pay back the loans. But since the federal government subsidizes everything ... there’s no incentive for lenders to care, and even less incentive for colleges and universities to care. They get their money up front, after all -- just like the people who wrote the subprime loans that fueled the housing crisis.

So what's the solution? Well, like most complex problems, there is no simple solution. But there are a few simple steps to take that would put us on the road to a solution. The steps are not exciting or glamorous. Nor are they easy. But nothing worthwhile is.

First, improve how we measure and reward (or punish) the job public schools do in preparing their students. Standardized tests have their place, but they are limited. Other, less objective measures also have a role. The trick is determining how to blend the two in assessing student preparedness. One way might be to increase or decrease funding to K-12 school districts based on the number of remedial courses their students have to take in college.

A second step would be to reemphasize the value of vocational education. It is not feasible, or even desirable, for every student to go to college. There are plenty of available, good-paying entry level jobs in the trades that do not require a college degree. We need to send a strong message to high-school students that there is value and honor in vocational careers.

Third, reduce the cost of a college education. It's absurd that kids are graduating from college with six-figure debts that they have no chance of repaying. Insisting that students meet reasonable standards before they are admitted (I've worked at universities where the only admission requirement was a high school diploma) would be a start. Eliminating unnecessary and 'feel good' programs would also help. (The university I'm currently at has an administrative department for freshman success, and another one for sophomore success. Presumably juniors and seniors can succeed on their own.) Furthermore, tenure reform is long overdue (I could write a book on the disadvantages and abuses of the tenure system).

There's lots more that can be done, and lots of detail work involved in these three steps that goes way beyond the bare bones put forth here, but we need to get started ASAP.

Not acting just means we'll get more of the same. More unprepared students, more unaffordable college education, and more failure on a broad front. Let's stop kicking the can down the road and fix the problem now.

In other words, let's not be like congress...

The Great Equalizer

As the old saying goes, "God created man, but Sam Colt made them equal." That old saying applies to women as well.

A young Oklahoma mother shot and killed an intruder to protect her 3-month-old baby on New Year's Eve, less than a week after the baby's father died of cancer.

Two men armed with knives tried to break into Sarah McKinley's home on New Year's Eve. Ms. McKinley called 911, then grabbed her 12-gauge shotgun and a pistol.

"I've got two guns in my hand -- is it okay to shoot him if he comes in this door?" the young mother asked the 911 dispatcher.

"I can't tell you that you can do that but you do what you have to do to protect your baby," the dispatcher told her. McKinley was on the phone with 911 for a total of 21 minutes.

When seconds count the police are minutes away.

When Martin kicked in the door and came after her with the knife, the teen mom shot and killed the 24-year-old. Police are calling the shooting justified.

"You're allowed to shoot an unauthorized person that is in your home. The law provides you the remedy, and sanctions the use of deadly force," Det. Dan Huff of the Blanchard police said.

McKinley said that she was at home alone with her newborn that night because her husband just died of cancer on Christmas Day.

"I wouldn't have done it, but it was my son," McKinley told ABC News Oklahoma City affiliate KOCO. "It's not an easy decision to make, but it was either going to be him or my son. And it wasn't going to be my son. There's nothing more dangerous than a woman with a child."

Except maybe an armed woman with a child.

It's too much to hope that the anti-gun nuts will learn anything from this. Without those weapons, an 18-year-old woman is no match for two men with knives. If this took place in California, New York, or any other place with restrictive gun controls, this story would have had a much different ending. And no one in the media would be lamenting "If only she were armed."

All snark aside, what a terrible holiday season for that young lady. I hope and pray that she and her child find peace and happiness for the rest of their holidays.

Do You Really Get What You Pay For?

As my regular readers (thanks, Mom and Dad) know, I believe that our public school systems are doing society a huge disservice by graduating students who are not prepared for either college or employment. While I could, if I had the time and inclination, provide a formal literature review documenting this failure, let me instead offer two arguments in support of my point.

The first is a chart that compares public school expenditures per student with test scores over time. It quickly becomes shockingly obvious that we are spending more - much, much more - and not gaining any improvement.

What's driving the growth in expenditures? IMO two things. First, teachers unions. Unions in general must force employers to pay above market wages. Otherwise there is no justification for the existence of the union. Unions also protect their own, at the expense of quality. Union contracts specify that teachers are laid off on the basis of seniority, not merit (or lack thereof). Thus we have situation like the ones in Milwaukee, Houston, Las Vegas, and Parsippany (NJ), where Teachers of the Year were laid off in 2011 in place of some old fossil longer tenured union member.

The second factor in growing school expenditures is the increasing emphasis on special programs and non-core subjects, driven by special interest groups. As these special programs grow, so also does the need for non-classroom staff to administer and monitor them. Case in point: New York state.

In New York, the number of administrators grew from 31,000 in 1997 to 42,000 in 2011 – a 33% increase. During that same time the number of teachers increased by 10%. Meanwhile, the number of students dropped by 5%.

It's not just the number of administrators, it's also their bloated salaries. One-third of NY school superintendents earn over $175,000 per year.

As a result, overall public-school expenditures more than doubled, from $26 billion to $58 billion statewide.

It wouldn't be so bad if the taxpayers received value for their dollar, but that hasn't been the case in New York. The state's graduation rate has hovered between 65 - 70%, ranking it around 40th in the country. More money spent, no improvement - a situation that is mirrored at the national level, as seen in the above chart.

A specific example of special interest-driven public school agendas is a new 2012 California law that requires California students to receive mandatory classroom instruction about the contributions of gays and lesbians to the development of the United States. I have nothing against gays or lesbians, and I don't deny they have contributed to this country's development. But by placing emphasis on every single group (gays, lesbians, blacks, Hispanics, left-handed redheads, etc.) we are losing sight of the forest for the trees. And by fragmenting learning into an endless series of lectures on diversity we are most definitely not preparing students to succeed in college and beyond. Does anyone really think that injecting gays and lesbians into history classes will increase test scores?

The second segment of my argument that public school systems are failing us is grounded in the now-global nature of the workforce. Multinational employers are increasingly turning their backs on American workers not because of wage scale differential (although that does play a role), but because of a quality differential. Earlier this year the President’s Council on Jobs and Competitiveness invited the heads of foreign companies that invest in the United States to discuss why they don't hire more U.S. workers.

“The issue that we have is finding skilled workers,” said Christian Turnig from ThyssenKrupp, a German company.

According to Turnig, his company had to send hundreds of employees from its new plant in Alabama to Germany for several months of training.

Martin Daum, the head of Daimler Trucks North America, told the gathering that he felt he had better skilled workers at his plants in Mexico than in the United States, where some workers have to be taught proper math and writing skills.

... According to Daum, the better skill sets of Mexican workers makes it easier to ramp up production at his company’s factories in Mexico than those in the United States.

“We have to bring in educators,” he said.

Peter Solmssen of Siemens said “it’s a skills issue.  We’re having to train them ourselves.”

Unprepared public school graduates. Unions that protect the administrators and teachers responsible for the graduates' lack pf preparedness. Special interest groups that get in the way.

And it gets worse. More unintended consequences tomorrow...

Corruptisima Republica Plurimae Leges

As David Martosko notes, translated from the Latin, the title of this post means ”The more corrupt the state, the more plentiful its laws." (H/T to Curmudgeonly & Skeptical for the link)

Laws are like technology. Over time, they become one of two things: indispensable or obsolete. It’s beyond me why most state and federal laws don’t have 15- or 20-year sunset clauses, so we could periodically dispense with the obsolete ones like so many floppy disc drives and 8-track tape decks.

For the record, Texas has a Sunset Commission that does just that, albeit on a limited basis. Still, it's a start. Now if we could just elect congresscritters with enough common sense and backbone to implement a similar panel on a national level we might have a fighting chance. Better yet, pass legislation stating that all laws passed by congress expire in three years unless they are specifically and individually extended.

In 1925 it would have taken you 12 days to read all the United States’ federal laws and regulations if you plowed through about 200 pages per day. Today that same task would take you three years.

obamacare and the Dodd-Frank bill alone account for 5000 of the new pages.

That's just at the federal level. At the state level there are approximately 40,000 new laws. Most of them are unnecessary, of course, but since when did that ever stop politicians from passing something to make some potential campaign contributor or voter happy. For example, one of California's new state laws prohibits the awarding of goldfish as a carnival prize. I'm sure goldfish and goldfish lovers across the state are sleeping easier tonight.

Of course, with all those new laws and regulations there's plenty of room for conflict and overlap. Case in point:

New environmental regulations, coming amid warnings that Texas might not meet its electricity needs next summer, could set up a legal dilemma for regulators, grid operators and generators.

The Environmental Protection Agency's Cross-State Air Pollution Rule, which takes effect Sunday, requires plants in 28 states including Texas to cut smog- and soot-forming emissions that cross state lines.

... power plant operators and their political supporters say the rule will force shutdowns of power plants needed to keep U.S. grid capacity safely above demand.

Here in Texas, at least one utility - Dallas based Luminant Generation Co. - will shut down two coal-fired generating units to comply with the EPA rule. Other state utilities are considering similar moves. As a result, the Electric Reliability Council of Texas, which operates the state's main electric grid, has projected power reserves will fall below its desired minimum next year.

So we have an agency of the federal government creating regulations - not legislation passed by our elected representatives, but rules thought up by bureaucrats to justify their existence - that will shut down existing power plants, eliminate jobs, and cause rolling blackouts throughout the state in the foreseeable future.

But just when you think all is lost, here comes a knight in shining armor riding to the rescue.

Another federal agency, the Energy Department, says it has the legal authority to require power plants to maintain grid reliability.

If you see a dilemma here - one agency saying stop, another saying go - you're not alone.

U.S. Rep. Pete Olson, R-Sugar Land, said generating companies could be in an untenable position if the department orders operation of plants idled because of EPA rules: By complying with one of the federal agencies, they may defy the other one.

He cited incidents over the past decade in California and Virginia, where Mirant Corp., now GenOn Energy Inc., was ordered to run generating units for reliability purposes, but faced legal action for environmental violations.

“It's not fair, when these companies do exactly what regulators ask them to do — keep the lights on — and then they're penalized for it,” Olson said in an interview.

Gina McCarthy, an EPA assistant administrator, said the Clean Air Act, which authorizes the cross-state rule, never has caused reliability problems and has mechanisms to prevent local reliability issues.

But EPA permission didn't protect Mirant from lawsuits when it faced conflicting federal mandates, GenOn lawyer Debra Raggio told federal energy regulators in a memo last month.

Gee, confusion and lies misleading information from federal agencies.

What a surprise...

Don't Blame Me

I'm out of town half the time...

San Antonio makes ‘Drunkest Cities’ list

For those who’ve sipped a margarita or a cold beer at one of San Antonio’s many watering holes or reveled in the alcohol-friendly Fiesta, it’s likely no surprise that media outlet The Daily Beast has ranked the city fifth on its list of “Drunkest Cities” in the U.S.

San Antonio staggered to fifth place this year after ranking 19th on last year’s list...

We're aiming for #1 next year.

Ranked first, with an average of 15.5 average monthly drinks consumed by person, is Boston. Other Texas cities that ranked were Austin, at No. 7, and Houston, at No. 25, the list states.

The Daily Beast in February ranked San Antonio as the best U.S. city for love, and previously the Alamo City was listed next to last among 55 U.S. cities for intelligence.

I know correlation isn't causation, but still, that last sentence makes one wonder...

FOD 2012.01.02

Hopefully everyone is alive and well this morning, even if you're not feeling at the top of your game. Let's all hope that we have a better 2012 than 2011.

On this, the first FOD of 2012, it is illustrative and amusing to look back on obama's 2011 performance. For your entertainment and amusement, here's a list of "The Obama administration’s top 10 foolish quotes of 2011."

10. Barack Obama refers to the “English Embassy” in Tehran

9. Hillary Clinton refers to Syrian dictator Assad as a “reformer”

8. Hillary Clinton calls the Mubarak regime “stable”

7. The US Ambassador to Belgium blames Israel for some forms of anti-Semitism

6. Director of National Intelligence James Clapper calls the Muslim Brotherhood "secular"

5. White House adviser touts Obama’s “leading from behind”

4. Joe Biden on the Taliban: “not our enemy”

3. Barack Obama calls France America’s strongest ally

2. Joe Biden compares the Tea Party to terrorists

And the Number One most foolish quote of the obama administration in 2011 is...

1. Barack Obama calls himself the fourth best president in US history

There's more at the link. Enjoy...

Sunday Funnies 2012.01.01

It's traditional to begin the New Year by making resolutions. Most are well-intentioned, but difficult to achieve. Here's a few more realistic ones.

 

 

Happy New Year

All the best to you and yours in 2012 - and beyond!